Never ever underestimate the mendacity, greed, and corruption of a rightwing politician in search of a buck. Same for Big Pharma, whose specious claims that Research and Development costs are what drive the price of new drugs. They don't, because universities and research institutes shoulder most of those bills these days. As someone who…
Never ever underestimate the mendacity, greed, and corruption of a rightwing politician in search of a buck. Same for Big Pharma, whose specious claims that Research and Development costs are what drive the price of new drugs. They don't, because universities and research institutes shoulder most of those bills these days. As someone who is in thrall to Big Pharma, because I am on a "specialty" drug that keeps me alive and the cancer at bay, I can very safely say they are exactly the kinds of companies that give capitalism a bad name. They all--not just the egregious Sackler family--made the price of opioids less than the price of milk because they knew that cheap opioids would addict millions of people and would enrich themselves, the doctors who got kickbacks for prescribing them, and the agents who shilled for them. In contrast, insulin--which has been around for ages and is more or less FREE everywhere else in the "developed" world because it costs nothing to make--has been used as a form of extortion because, even though insulin-dependent diabetics are a significant population, they are still a minority, and one that is poorly understood by the public--which doesn't understand the difference between Type 1 and Type 2 and therefore blames the victims of this condition with specious and bigoted claims that it is "their" fault they are insulin dependent. So, in the neo-Victorian drive to create categories of people "deserving" of help and "undeserving"--revived under Ronnie Ray-gun and now the fundamental position of all Despicables and Deplorables in the USA--diabetics are to be extorted and shamed and told they can just die if they don't want to pay for their "crime" of being insulin dependent.
The reasons why the meds I am on are listed as having a retail price (without insurance) of $24,000 A MONTH has nothing to do with R&D, or with the costs of manufacturing it (pennies). It has to do with the utter greed and cynicism of Big Pharma, which has been using cancer patients as their personal slush fund for decades. I don't pay this cost but the hoops I have had to go through and the groveling I have had to engage in to "prove" that I am "worthy" of receiving assistance to pay for this drug has been enlightening to me because it is a performance the drug company REQUIRES in order for me to receive this drug that is keeping me alive. And why? Because the class of meds I am on are very effective for a time, and then they are not. So Big Pharma knows that when they advertise that this one or that one can give a cancer patient "more time" they are talking about months or a few years--not a lifetime. And they also know that they have to get their money fast, because the length of time people are on this medication is an average of 3 years. So they gotta make their billions as quickly as possible.
Sorry: I have been dealing with this crap all week and I am so totally, utterly fed up. Thanks for letting me blow off some steam.
I'm glad you blew off some steam. "cancer patients as their personal slush fund for decades" is quite the description.
Hearing your story makes me (is "glad" the right word?) that my breast cancer treatment was short term and (so far) effective. I noted earlier that because of FABULOUS health insurance I had at the time, I was able to get Neulesta post chemo tx, and some really powerful anti-nausea drugs at $4-6K per script, for no cost to me. Surgery, chemo, radiation, hormone therapy all covered completely by insurance. I did not pay a cent. (I did have to return to full time work just before starting radiation therapy, but that was the county's policy at the time... 6 months and you return to work, or you're gone.)
The "county's policy"---I read that and knowing that you were in the police force, I can't help but wonder what percentage of the county's policy were female. There can be a huge discrepancy between breast cancer patients and their course of treatments depending upon the type of cancer and staging of the tumor. Pretty hard to lay down a line of 6 months.
When I was working closely with pediatric oncology, I saw extended family (and even a few times, a neighbor) bring kids in for their chemo. The parent HAD to work to have the medical coverage to treat the child.
Ally, I’m a 2 x bc survivor. Didn’t have chemo but received tamoxifen which caused hair thinning and awful joint pain. Also, in the early 90’s, after having my second daughter, carpal tunnel developed in my left hand. So painful that I couldn’t sleep. I too, was put on “modified work”. HR tried to tell me that it was because I had been pregnant that I got carpal tunnel. Excuse me, but the hand I got in is the only one I have! I was born with one hand and a cute little stump on the right side that my husband named “Shorty”. But this accusation was really crazy because I worked for an insurance company as a claims supervisor for anything over $100,000. Because I became injured at work, I filed a Worker’s Comp claim. (Oh, and I worked those types of claims too!) For the first time in my life, I became a claimant. This company had a monopoly on these claims as they handled “their own” in-house. It was quite a revelation to be on the other side of the fence. Their treatment of my issues was horrendous! Imagine what they do to people who don’t know the laws.
Ally so glad you're doing well!!! In my first breast cancer situation, 27 years ago, I worked full time through the entire process. As an academic I could take time off in the summer to deal with all the surgeries but was teaching during the rest of the treatment. It was difficult. And I had to shell out a fair amount of money, but a manageable amount.
Ally, my brother had an unidentified blood disorder that required he get a Neulasta shot about every 6-8 weeks. Because the docs couldn't identify why his white blood count dipped dangerously, his insurance wouldn't cover the cost. This was 10 years ago, and I believe he was paying $4K per shot. He has passed from a heart attack, but I believe his heart was probably weakened by fighting the blood disorder for such a long time...3+ years.
One of my insulin dependent daughters is Type I, she has been so since 1980. The other is dependent due to pancreatitis. And yes, we have experienced the panic of the high prices. Your perspective on "their fault" is important. There are social factors involved that society must take some blame for......
Well said, and, if possible, understated. The PhRMA gets about 10% of each major drug company's gross revenue every year for lobbying purposes. We have a very tough row to hoe when it comes to making drug pricing rational.
Many of today's miracle drugs required years of research and development at high cost. However, 17 year patent protection has still resulted in incredible profits for companies with the horsepower to develop them, provided the market for them is big enough and their market power is not diluted by "me too" analogues. Sales of Tylenol still make it profitable to manufacture and sell at comparatively minimal price per daily maximal recommended dosages. In fact, every miracle drug doesn't have to "pay for itself" when some that are developed become so universally utilized that they create immense profits at relatively low unit dose prices. Orphan drugs that will essentially never become profit centers for the companies that researched, developed and manufactured them need to have different mechanisms to reach the marketplace at affordable cost than the Tylenols of this world. In many cases, the rise of the generics after patent protection has expired has the expected effect; the compound is manufactured by several competitors and the price plummets. When market forces don't work, as in the case of insulin, that's when governments need to step in and regulate the market to the benefit of the public, rather than that of the manufacturers. One knows when one has squeezed the profit margins too much when producers choose to get out of the market rather than stay in it and compete in the presence of constraints on price.
Never ever underestimate the mendacity, greed, and corruption of a rightwing politician in search of a buck. Same for Big Pharma, whose specious claims that Research and Development costs are what drive the price of new drugs. They don't, because universities and research institutes shoulder most of those bills these days. As someone who is in thrall to Big Pharma, because I am on a "specialty" drug that keeps me alive and the cancer at bay, I can very safely say they are exactly the kinds of companies that give capitalism a bad name. They all--not just the egregious Sackler family--made the price of opioids less than the price of milk because they knew that cheap opioids would addict millions of people and would enrich themselves, the doctors who got kickbacks for prescribing them, and the agents who shilled for them. In contrast, insulin--which has been around for ages and is more or less FREE everywhere else in the "developed" world because it costs nothing to make--has been used as a form of extortion because, even though insulin-dependent diabetics are a significant population, they are still a minority, and one that is poorly understood by the public--which doesn't understand the difference between Type 1 and Type 2 and therefore blames the victims of this condition with specious and bigoted claims that it is "their" fault they are insulin dependent. So, in the neo-Victorian drive to create categories of people "deserving" of help and "undeserving"--revived under Ronnie Ray-gun and now the fundamental position of all Despicables and Deplorables in the USA--diabetics are to be extorted and shamed and told they can just die if they don't want to pay for their "crime" of being insulin dependent.
The reasons why the meds I am on are listed as having a retail price (without insurance) of $24,000 A MONTH has nothing to do with R&D, or with the costs of manufacturing it (pennies). It has to do with the utter greed and cynicism of Big Pharma, which has been using cancer patients as their personal slush fund for decades. I don't pay this cost but the hoops I have had to go through and the groveling I have had to engage in to "prove" that I am "worthy" of receiving assistance to pay for this drug has been enlightening to me because it is a performance the drug company REQUIRES in order for me to receive this drug that is keeping me alive. And why? Because the class of meds I am on are very effective for a time, and then they are not. So Big Pharma knows that when they advertise that this one or that one can give a cancer patient "more time" they are talking about months or a few years--not a lifetime. And they also know that they have to get their money fast, because the length of time people are on this medication is an average of 3 years. So they gotta make their billions as quickly as possible.
Sorry: I have been dealing with this crap all week and I am so totally, utterly fed up. Thanks for letting me blow off some steam.
Blow as much steam as needed. Your story is a fine example of why we need "healthcare for all".
And some rational approach to pricing.
I'm glad you blew off some steam. "cancer patients as their personal slush fund for decades" is quite the description.
Hearing your story makes me (is "glad" the right word?) that my breast cancer treatment was short term and (so far) effective. I noted earlier that because of FABULOUS health insurance I had at the time, I was able to get Neulesta post chemo tx, and some really powerful anti-nausea drugs at $4-6K per script, for no cost to me. Surgery, chemo, radiation, hormone therapy all covered completely by insurance. I did not pay a cent. (I did have to return to full time work just before starting radiation therapy, but that was the county's policy at the time... 6 months and you return to work, or you're gone.)
The "county's policy"---I read that and knowing that you were in the police force, I can't help but wonder what percentage of the county's policy were female. There can be a huge discrepancy between breast cancer patients and their course of treatments depending upon the type of cancer and staging of the tumor. Pretty hard to lay down a line of 6 months.
When I was working closely with pediatric oncology, I saw extended family (and even a few times, a neighbor) bring kids in for their chemo. The parent HAD to work to have the medical coverage to treat the child.
It is despicable that we, the people, have to beat on our chests to get anything decent for ourselves or our children! America “Land of the Free”??
It was an absolute. There were some times (pregnancy being one of them) that a “modified duty assignment” would extend the time.
When I went back to work I had whispy, thin hair starting to come back.
Ally, I’m a 2 x bc survivor. Didn’t have chemo but received tamoxifen which caused hair thinning and awful joint pain. Also, in the early 90’s, after having my second daughter, carpal tunnel developed in my left hand. So painful that I couldn’t sleep. I too, was put on “modified work”. HR tried to tell me that it was because I had been pregnant that I got carpal tunnel. Excuse me, but the hand I got in is the only one I have! I was born with one hand and a cute little stump on the right side that my husband named “Shorty”. But this accusation was really crazy because I worked for an insurance company as a claims supervisor for anything over $100,000. Because I became injured at work, I filed a Worker’s Comp claim. (Oh, and I worked those types of claims too!) For the first time in my life, I became a claimant. This company had a monopoly on these claims as they handled “their own” in-house. It was quite a revelation to be on the other side of the fence. Their treatment of my issues was horrendous! Imagine what they do to people who don’t know the laws.
Wow!!
Ally so glad you're doing well!!! In my first breast cancer situation, 27 years ago, I worked full time through the entire process. As an academic I could take time off in the summer to deal with all the surgeries but was teaching during the rest of the treatment. It was difficult. And I had to shell out a fair amount of money, but a manageable amount.
Ally, my brother had an unidentified blood disorder that required he get a Neulasta shot about every 6-8 weeks. Because the docs couldn't identify why his white blood count dipped dangerously, his insurance wouldn't cover the cost. This was 10 years ago, and I believe he was paying $4K per shot. He has passed from a heart attack, but I believe his heart was probably weakened by fighting the blood disorder for such a long time...3+ years.
I’m sure there’s a correlation there.
One of my insulin dependent daughters is Type I, she has been so since 1980. The other is dependent due to pancreatitis. And yes, we have experienced the panic of the high prices. Your perspective on "their fault" is important. There are social factors involved that society must take some blame for......
Well said, and, if possible, understated. The PhRMA gets about 10% of each major drug company's gross revenue every year for lobbying purposes. We have a very tough row to hoe when it comes to making drug pricing rational.
Many of today's miracle drugs required years of research and development at high cost. However, 17 year patent protection has still resulted in incredible profits for companies with the horsepower to develop them, provided the market for them is big enough and their market power is not diluted by "me too" analogues. Sales of Tylenol still make it profitable to manufacture and sell at comparatively minimal price per daily maximal recommended dosages. In fact, every miracle drug doesn't have to "pay for itself" when some that are developed become so universally utilized that they create immense profits at relatively low unit dose prices. Orphan drugs that will essentially never become profit centers for the companies that researched, developed and manufactured them need to have different mechanisms to reach the marketplace at affordable cost than the Tylenols of this world. In many cases, the rise of the generics after patent protection has expired has the expected effect; the compound is manufactured by several competitors and the price plummets. When market forces don't work, as in the case of insulin, that's when governments need to step in and regulate the market to the benefit of the public, rather than that of the manufacturers. One knows when one has squeezed the profit margins too much when producers choose to get out of the market rather than stay in it and compete in the presence of constraints on price.